Common Objections to Animal Rights Activism

As advocates for the intrinsic rights of animals to live peacefully and free
from the impositions bestowed upon them by humans, we may occasionally have our
motives questioned. Most times, individuals have an authentic curiosity and ask
us out of a genuine sense of interest and integrity. Let’s look at two of the
most prevalent objections that can come our way and test some tried and true
responses.

One common objection involves the “burning building” scenario: There’s a
burning building with two bodies inside—one is a child and one is your dog. Who
do you save? I usually answer this inquiry with another question: “Well, let’s
think about this. Let’s say that there are two children in that building. Who
would you choose?” The inquirer usually says, “I don’t know.” Then, I raise the
stakes: “Let’s say one is your child.” Inevitably and understandably, the
inquirer answers that her or she would rescue his or her own child. But my next
question is critical: “Well, does that mean that you don’t value the life of the
other child?” The answer is: “Of course not!” And then I explain to the inquirer
that any time we are asked to make a decision about whom we would rescue from a
burning building, our personal values always come into play. But that doesn’t
mean we value the other life any less.

Here’s another common objection: Why are you wasting your time on animals
when there are children starving? For some reason, there is a prevailing
perception that people who love animals are not fond of children or do not care
about human suffering. The truth is that the two issues have far more in common
than not. There are three things to note about this objection. Firstly, the
dichotomy presented is, of course, false—it is not an either/or situation. You
can certainly work on helping humans as well as animals. Secondly, we all know
that there are a lot of humans in dire need of help, but animals endure a
massive amount of suffering (thousands of animals around the world suffer and
die daily on factory farms alone) and have no way to speak up for themselves.
The third and biggest point for me is that we all have a different calling.
Animals need help, and someone must rise to the occasion.

The common thread between both objections is certainly speciesism; both are
built on the assumption that an animal’s life is less valuable than a human’s.
It is now common scientific knowledge that animals feel pain just as we do and
that they are sentient and conscious beings just as we are. So the real question
is: What exactly makes us more important?

We know that there will always be questions about why we decided to make the
rights of animals a priority in our lives. There are many other objections that
I could share, and most of them are probably addressed here. My main point is
that we all need to avoid “fighting” for our honor when confronted with these
objections. Instead, consider a respectful and tolerant approach that will, if
you play your cards right, result in a profoundly teachable moment that just may
give your objector something to mull over. And that would be a job well done!

What common objections to fighting for the rights of animals do you hear
often?

Fair Use Notice: This document may contain copyrighted material whose use has
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owners. We believe that this
not-for-profit, educational use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the
copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).
If you wish to use this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go
beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.